Romney pulls into tie with Obama in Ohio, Florida: poll

Judged:

2

2

1

Ex-GOP Con wrote:

<quoted text>
Fox News Entertainment lies. Blatantly too.

Reality wrote:

<quoted text>
http://www.rgj.com/article/20120503/NEWS19/30...
"Supporters of presidential candidate U.S. Rep. Ron Paul said Thursday that they will continue their strategy to elect as many Paul supporters as possible as delegates to the national convention during Saturday’s state GOP convention — despite written threats from the Republican National Committee.
The RNC, in a letter sent to state GOP Chairman Michael McDonald, threatened to bar the Nevada delegation from the national convention in Tampa, Fla., if it is stacked with supporters of Paul, R-Texas.
Yet, Carl Bunce, chairman of Paul’s campaign in Nevada, said he will continue his strategy of electing as many Paul supporters as possible to Nevada’s national delegation on Saturday at the state convention at John Ascuaga’s Nugget in Sparks.
Bunce noted that his campaign is only following the rules of the party by trying to pack the convention with Paul supporters. He noted former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s campaign also could try to pack the campaign with his supporters and be within the rules.
Bunce called the letter, written by RNC chief counsel John R. Phillippe Jr.,“a creative writing assignment given to them by the Romney campaign to threaten the Paul supporters and Ron Paul campaign.
“It’s ridiculous. It is nothing more than a veiled threat.”"
I have this wet (or pipe) dream that Paul is merely gathering support for his primary fraud claim that he will make and support with video etc, at the convention while announcing his third party bid...

Judged:

3

3

1

Reality wrote:

<quoted text>
I would think if the worst recession since the depression is used as an excuse for other things, it also provides a reason that we would vary from this standard. Its just not that often in our history that we have had such a long downturn that so many people are falling off the back end of being in the employment market.
So a stat that captures those that fall off the back end is more necessary now than ever...

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality wrote:

<quoted text>
fair enough...
Lets see what the VP's bring to the table...
do you figure Obama is sticking with Joe?
My conspiracy theory is that the OBL story where he wanted Biden to run the country was planted just to drop Biden...
As for Romney,a Kelly Ayote VP, with Paul as treasurer or something, would be pretty powerful...

Judged:

1

1

1

Socialism is for Sissies wrote:

<quoted text>See, here's where you get in trouble. The "jobless rate" is NOT falling. The number of eligible unemployment filers is falling. That's a big difference. The number is falling because folks have exhausted there claims eligibilty and are STILL jobless. The number of unemployed has increased because job creation cannot keep pace with those falling off the unemployment benefit rolls.
Rest assured, the 87 million unemployed right now know what I'm talking about and they know people who vote.
Don't confuse the U3 smoke and mirrors number with the U6 number by the BLS.

Judged:

1

1

1

From the Artilce wrote:

"The new poll found Romney with 44 percent to Obama's 43 percent in Florida, where Obama led by 7 percentage points in late March. In Ohio, where Obama led by 6 points in late March, Obama had 44 percent to Romney's 42 percent."

Judged:

1

1

1

Here in Vegas wrote:

2010 was a gang rape for the libs. 2012 is a repeat, except no KY this time.
Progressive liberalism is dying. One way or another, sooner or later the era of leftist entitlement comes to an end.

Judged:

1

1

1

Here in Vegas wrote:

<quoted text>
This is not good for team obama. You libs should get ready for his defeat.

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality wrote:

<quoted text>
I think a lot of people think of fox's news station commentators as opposed to fox news.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
Those stats are readily available from the BLS, but for consistancy they use the same U-3 calculation they've used for decades. This way an accurate comparison can be made year to year without having to adjust for which formula is used.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
You really need to look at an electoral map sometime. Obama's got a comfortable 10 point lead in more than enough states to win the election. In fact, he can lose Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana (all states he won in '08) and STILL have enough electoral votes to win.
The math simply doesn't add up for Romney. He's not even leading in ANY of him multiple "home states". No candidate has won the Presidency without winning his own home state since 1918. Doesn't look like that streak is going to be broken this time either.

WeTheSheeple wrote:

<quoted text>
You really need to look at an electoral map sometime. Obama's got a comfortable 10 point lead in more than enough states to win the election. In fact, he can lose Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, and Indiana (all states he won in '08) and STILL have enough electoral votes to win.
The math simply doesn't add up for Romney. He's not even leading in ANY of him multiple "home states". No candidate has won the Presidency without winning his own home state since 1918. Doesn't look like that streak is going to be broken this time either.

Judged:

1

1

1

JBH wrote:

This is a brand new election --Romney vs Obama.
It will be critical for Obama to win California as the minimum first step, or otherwise it is all over.
Battleground states are Florida, Ohio, Kansas, Indiana.
Romney is able to take Virginia, and possibly Indiana, Florida and Ohio.
Romney will sweep New England, plus Pensylvania, probably New York and possibly CALIFORNIA.

Gary wrote:

<quoted text>
Ahem!
The current view of the 2012 presidential election, based on HuffPost Pollster charts and analysis.
Electoral outlook:
Obama....288
Romney...170
And besides, Ron Paul might just ace out Romney at the Repubicrook convention.